beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.02.13 2014고단3569

사기등

Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.

The defendant shall pay 10,280,000 won to E who is an applicant for compensation.

3.2

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

[Attachment] On November 28, 2008, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of six months for fraud at the Seoul Central District Court, and on August 24, 201, the Defendant was released on December 24, 2012, and the remaining term of imprisonment was expired on May 9, 2013, when he was released from military prison on December 24, 201, by a two-year imprisonment for fraud at the same court.

【Criminal Facts】

On December 28, 2012, the Defendant: (a) voluntarily visited the G dental clinic located in Seodaemun-gu Seoul, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul; (b) introduced the victim I, the president of the G, as G H dental clinic; (c) provided medical treatment to him/her until February 2013; and (d) he/she surbling him/herself on the victim’s cell phone on March 1, 2013; and (c) posted the phone to the victim’s cell phone on May 1, 2013, the Defendant concluded that “I may surbling him/her more than the time frame at the latest, at the latest, at the end of May 2013.”

However, at the time, the defendant was not an instructor belonging to G or Emers, and the defendant was instructed to demand the debt amounting to 22 million won without any special revenue or property, and even if he received money from the victim, he was thought to be used as a personal debt repayment, etc., and there was no intention or ability to purchase Emers bank.

Nevertheless, on March 1, 2013, the Defendant: (a) by deceiving the victim as above; (b) received KRW 6,236,540 from the account of community credit cooperatives in the name of the Defendant on March 1, 2013; and (c) received KRW 35,603,740 in total on eight occasions until October 18, 2013, as shown in attached Table 1 of the Crimes List of Crimes; and (b) obtained them from the victim as the same account; and (c) acquired them by fraud.

On November 21, 2013, the Defendant 2014dan4043, the Defendant was in the French head office of the company that produced and sold the scam and the scambling.

It is different to send the value of the article in order to purchase one half of the domestic consumer price.